Internal and emergency medicine
-
After an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) it is imperative to balance the bleeding vs. the ischemic risk given the similar prognostic impact of the two events. Since the post-discharge bleeding risk is substantially stable over time whereas the ischemic risk accumulates in the first weeks to months, a strategy of de-escalation of antithrombotic treatment, consisting in the reduction of either the duration (i.e., early interruption of one antiplatelet agent) or the intensity (i.e., switching from the more potent P2Y12-inhibitors prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel) of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), has been proposed. ⋯ Overall, all de-escalation strategies have shown to consistently decrease bleeding events with no apparent increase in ischemic events as compared to 12-month standard-of-care DAPT. Owing however to several limitations and weaknesses of the available evidence, de-escalation strategies are currently not recommended as a routine, but should rather be considered for selected ACS patients, such as those at increased risk of bleeding.
-
The global increase of aging with the related increase of multiple noncommunicable diseases is inevitably accompanied by the associated issue of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The latter is not without peculiar consequences on health, because it has been shown to be associated with drug-related adverse events, mainly due to poor prescription appropriateness and drug-drug interactions. ⋯ Through the last 15 years, data on nearly 11,000 older people have been accrued during their hospital stay in internal medicine and geriatric wards. This review article summarizes the main findings obtained, and how these data contribute to tackle the issue of appropriateness of drug prescription and the need of deprescribing in hospitalized older people affected by the most common noncommunicable diseases.
-
Low-dose azithromycin prophylaxis is associated with improved outcomes in people suffering frequent exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but the use of macrolides in patients with cardiovascular disease has been debated. To investigate the risk of adverse events after COPD exacerbations in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with azithromycin prophylaxis. Retrospective cohort study within the TriNetX Platform, including AF patients with COPD exacerbations. ⋯ On sensitivity analyses, the reduced risk of adverse events in azithromycin users was irrespective of smoking status, exacerbation severity, and type of oral anticoagulation. Azithromycin prophylaxis is associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, thrombotic and hemorrhagic events in AF patients with COPD. The possible role of azithromycin prophylaxis as part of the integrated care management of AF patients with COPD needs further study.
-
Monocyte distribution width (MDW) has been associated with inflammation and poor prognosis in various acute diseases. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations (ECOPD) are associated with mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the utility of the MDW as a predictor of ECOPD prognosis. ⋯ In ROC analysis, a combined MDW-DECAF score had better diagnostic power (AUC 0.777 95% IC 0.708-0.845, p < 0.001) than DECAF (p = 0.023), MDW (p = 0.026) or C-RP (p = 0.002) alone. MDW is associated with ECOPD severity and predicts mortality and ICU admission with a diagnostic accuracy similar to that of DECAF and C-RP. The MDW- DECAF score has better diagnostic accuracy than MDW or DECAF alone in identifying mortality or ICU admission.
-
To evaluate the prognostic stratification ability of 4C Mortality Score and COVID-19 Mortality Risk Score in different age groups. Retrospective study, including all patients, presented to the Emergency Department of the University Hospital Careggi, between February, 2020 and May, 2021, and admitted for SARS-CoV2. Patients were divided into four subgroups based on the quartiles of age distribution: patients < 57 years (G1, n = 546), 57-71 years (G2, n = 508), 72-81 years (G3, n = 552), and > 82 years (G4, n = 578). ⋯ Both scores were higher among non-survivors than survivors in all subgroups (4C-MS, G1: 6 [3-7] vs 3 [2-5]; G2: 10 [7-11] vs 7 [5-8]; G3: 11 [10-14] vs 10 [8-11]; G4: 13 [12-15] vs 11 [10-13], all p < 0.001; COVID-19 MRS, G1: 8 [7-9] vs 9 [9-11], G2: 10 [8-11] vs 11 [10-12]; G3: 11 [10-12] vs 12 [11-13]; G4: 11 [10-13] vs 13 [12-14], all p < 0.01). The ability of both scores to identify patients at higher risk of in-hospital mortality, was similar in different age groups (4C-MS: G1 0.77, G2 0.76, G3 0.68, G4 0.72; COVID-19 MRS: G1 0.67, G2 0.69, G3 0.69, G4 0.72, all p for comparisons between subgroups = NS). Both scores confirmed their good performance in predicting in-hospital mortality in all age groups, despite their different mortality rate.